It's not bad AT ALL. The cardstock is thin, but firm and whippy. It is NOT photographic paper --I have some right here and just compared them. Besides, it is too well cut. It is definitely cardstock, and better than I expected it to be, with a linen-like texture, though I don't think it's linen --too thin, too glossy, not fleshy enough. Or maybe it is. The lamination is a little glossier than I'd like, but it works well with the softer colors that John mentioned.

If you look at John's pictures, you'll see that the inner hand-drawn border that may or may not have been drawn by Pixie herself and that is on every single RWS deck is missing here. Not that I miss it (I don't) just stating a fact. Its absence gives a sort of even softer feel to the cards.

The lines have a sharpness that is closer to the new AGMuller decks or the Centennial than to other editions. The muted colors are like nothing I have ever seen. I wish connoisseurs of the RWS editions would chime in. It does seem to be like what it claims: a reproduction of one of the first antique editions --which would also account for the muted coloring.

The (Helix Nebula?) backs are sort of meh, but preferable to that godawful plaid (is there a puking emoji?), and at least they are free of white borders or obsessive copyright stamps.

P.S. To my inexpert eyes, it does look like a faded Pam A, or even a 1909 one. (Looking at the Sun card.)

A little bit thicker card stock, take away the god awful picture on the back, and a bit less gloss would make these an A+.

I'm making them seam awful, and their not They're better than what I expected. I would purchase them again. I really do like the colors.....

Hoping the creator is reading this
I am going after AGM's latest English edition while I wait for any developments with this creator
So.... what's the story with copyright for these other "reproductions" out there then.... I don't get how USG is chasing after AGM but small batches of repros are OK...? Or....?

Hoping the creator is reading this
I am going after AGM's latest English edition while I wait for any developments with this creator
So.... what's the story with copyright for these other "reproductions" out there then.... I don't get how USG is chasing after AGM but small batches of repros are OK...? Or....?

You have a point there. All of a sudden, these self-published repros are popping all over the place. There's this one -- real good except for the amateurish backs -- and there's the one with pebbled backs from the guy who has a waterproof option, which sadly squishes the images. (Still pretty usable, though.) Both claim to be photographic reproductions of antique decks.

Either someone has found a loophole (that you can commercially reproduce a RWS deck in your possession?) or they won't be around for long.

P.S. They're now popping up in the States, I mean. China and Ukraine do not give a rat's behind about all this and do as they please.

The Aeclectic Tarot Forum closed permanently on July 14th, 2017. The public threads remain online as a read-only archive and resource. More information on our decision can be found here. Thank you for being a part of our active community over the past seventeen years.